MOD evaluation of T-80U

[zed]

I read the other day that in 1992 the UK MOD bought through a third party at least one T-80U tank from Russia. I cannot find a photo or find any information how it was painted. Does anyone here have any more info on it?

Thanks

Graham

[Centaur95]

You won't - if (and it's a big 'if') the MOD acquired a T-80 back then, they wouldn't have advertised it, would have been tucked it away somewhere nice and quiet (and secret) and certainly wouldn't be allowing random photographers access to it.

Yes, there is good evidence that the MOD have at times purchased, borrowed or leased a range of foreign MBTs and other AFVs for evaluation, but with rare exceptions it's done on the QT because neither side wants to admit that they might be sharing technology and evaluation data (and sometimes it's just politically inconvenient to admit connections with Country 'X').

The best-known examples are probably the dozen or so S-Tanks leased from Sweden in the mid/late 1960s. Because it was such a radical design, several countries leased examples to test out the concept - we Brits borrowed enough to carry out tactical trials for several months if I remember correctly. Despite that, only a handful of photos were ever released.

Cheers,

Centaur

[zed]

Centaur,

The evidence that I have is that the Minister of Defence (AF) in an written answer to an MPs questions in 1994 admitted that at least one was bought in 1992. This much is in Hansards. I left the MOD in 1989 so I no longer have contacts there, so looking for answers elsewhere. I have evidence here in the US that one was provided by the UK to the US Army for use at the Aberdeen proving ground, but can't find out whether that was the only one the the UK had.

I was hoping that by now something else may have been released. The new kits recently released have me itching to make one, and as usual I want to make something different.

Thanks

[viper-30]

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199394/cmhansrd/1994-02-03/Writtens-9.html

Scroll down

Terry

[zed]

Terry,

I have read that Hansard which is the only proof that there was one in the UK. From my time writing such answers for the RAF, I know that reading the words carefully is important.

" In 1992 a Russian T80U tank was imported for defence research and development purposes."

Note that nothing is said about buying, which makes me somewhat question my original post. Also, it states "a" rather than a number. The other thing of note is what is not stated. It refers only to 1992, nothing is said of prior or subsequent years. Also, it is restricted to a T-80U, not other marks.

Graham

Edited March 13, 2014 by zed

[Procopius]

From my time writing such answers for the RAF, I know that reading the words carefully is important.

Not to get too far afield, but that sounds like the coolest job ever (that might reasonably fall within a skillset I'm even remotely capable of developing).

[pigsty]

The other trick with Parliamentary Questions is to read the question. This is because we play the game of answering exactly what the MP asked. That's why, when one MP asked a Minister how many of his staff were either (a) men, or (b ) women, the answer was "All of them". In this case the question was:

"To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on his Department's receipt of a tank from Russia for research purposes."

So if there had been another tank or tanks imported for any other purpose, that would have been outside the terms of the question and would have been left out of the answer. On the other hand, the question was about "a tank" and the answer specified what type, so it's likely that there was no attempt to cover up the existence of other types. There's also the exchange:

"To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether any department of his Ministry has taken delivery of a T80U main battle tank."

"Yes. A Russian T80U tank was imported for defence research and development purposes."

So it's possible to conclude that there really was only one tank, and that it was imported for R&D purposes.

Mind you, the Minister was Jonathan Aitken, wielder of the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play. Fair play to the man, I've met him since then and he's genuinely a reformed character. But back then ...

[zed]

Not to get too far afield, but that sounds like the coolest job ever (that might reasonably fall within a skillset I'm even remotely capable of developing).

That was just a small aspect of my job, some of the other bits were even better, The only downside was that I was limited to 2 years.

[zed]

So it's possible to conclude that there really was only one tank, and that it was imported for R&D purposes.

Mind you, the Minister was Jonathan Aitken, wielder of the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play. Fair play to the man, I've met him since then and he's genuinely a reformed character. But back then ...

Agreed that only one tank is likely, but note that in both answers, there is specific reference to a T-80U. no mention made of a B, BV etc.

From my experience, the answer would be written by a low level civil servant in the DS branch for the Army, IIRC DS6, then edited to take out unnecessary words, so that the answer is the minimum amount of truth required to answer the question, the wording of which is important, but nothing more. The Minister rarely had anything to do with it, unless the question was planted. But that is another subject.

[David Womby]

I used to write answers to Parliamentary Questions too. Smaller world than we thought. I wrote them for the FCO in the 70s. The biggest challenge was anticipating what might be asked in the supplementaries to Oral Questions.

David

[Procopius]

In fact, at the time the question was asked, the T-80B equipped the entirety of the Queen's Dragoon Guards. A more carefully worded question would have brought this out.

[zed]

I used to write answers to Parliamentary Questions too. Smaller world than we thought. I wrote them for the FCO in the 70s. The biggest challenge was anticipating what might be asked in the supplementaries to Oral Questions.

David

David,

So true, supplemental questions were always the problem, written ones were much easier to deal with.

Small world indeed.

Graham

[zed]

A more carefully worded question would have brought this out.

Exactly the issue.

[Pin]

I definitely know that it was evaluated in Sweden alongside Leclerc and Leopard 2A5 - can find a link, if anyone is interested

[zed]

I definitely know that it was evaluated in Sweden alongside Leclerc and Leopard 2A5 - can find a link, if anyone is interested

Yes, I would be very interested in any link about this.

[Pin]

The book - in Swedish

http://www.abebooks.co.uk/Svenskt-pansar-svensk-stridsfordonsutveckling-Lindstr%C3%B6m-Rickard/11329632699/bd

Two pages in Russian

http://armor.kiev.ua/wiki/index.php?title=%D0%A2-80%D0%A3_%D0%B2_%D0%A8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8

http://maxwolf.livejournal.com/67553.html

No English - sorry

[Dave Fleming]

The story of UK Evaluation of Soviet hardware has remained secret long after the US has declassified some of it's work - there were various bits of MiG at Farnborough over the years, and in the 80s a strong rumour suggested a Hind had been brought from Pakistan.

[rickshaw]

I wonder why they had to purchase it? In ~1992 the Russians actually offered the British Army an advanced T80 variant utilising ceramic armour in their unsolicited bid for the Challenger I replacement competition. In the process they basically told them everything they wanted to know about the T80. This was reported in Jane's at the time.

[tarlucan]

I do recall an old Brixmis colleague lamenting all the acts of derring do previously required, now being replaced by a "we just go and buy one now" attitude.

Edited March 16, 2014 by tarlucan

[Kingsman]

1992 would have been about the time of development of CR2. Vickers were running prototypes around the Catterick driver training circuit about then. Having the primary threat to compare it with would only have been sensible. There's also no knowing whether the build standard was current Russian or a dumbed-down version to mislead. AFAIK T-80 was never exported, but it would have been a real coup to sell it to us.